• commentary
  • FRIDAY MARCH 23 2012 9:26 AM

A Doctor On Transvaginal Ultrasounds: Where Is The Physician Outrage?

There’s one group of people that has been strangely silent when it comes to the current War on Women, and more specifically legislation that requires women to have a state-mandated transvaginal ultrasound before an abortion. Before being allowed to practice, physicians take the hippocratic oath – a promise that they will do no harm. This politically driven policy clearly forces medical practitioners to violate that oath, since the procedure is invasive, uncomfortable, medically unnecessary, not to mention highly emotionally distressing for many women. Here, in a post that was first published on Whatever.scalzi.com, an anonymous doctor speaks out against what’s been dubbed “state-rape.” – Nicole Powers, SG Ed.



Where Is The Physician Outrage?

by An Anonymous Doctor

Right. Here.

I’m speaking, of course, about the required-transvaginal-ultrasound thing that seems to be the flavor-of-the-month in politics.

I do not care what your personal politics are. I think we can all agree that my right to swing my fist ends where your face begins.

I do not feel that it is reactionary or even inaccurate to describe an unwanted, non-indicated transvaginal ultrasound as “rape”. If I insert ANY object into ANY orifice without informed consent, it is rape. And coercion of any kind negates consent, informed or otherwise.

In all of the discussion and all of the outrage and all of the Doonesbury comics, I find it interesting that we physicians are relatively silent.

After all, it’s our hands that will supposedly be used to insert medical equipment (tools of HEALING, for the sake of all that is good and holy) into the vaginas of coerced women.

Fellow physicians, once again we are being used as tools to screw people over. This time, it’s the politicians who want to use us to implement their morally reprehensible legislation.

They want to use our ultrasound machines to invade women’s bodies, and they want our hands to be at the controls. Coerced and invaded women, you have a problem with that? Blame us evil doctors. We are such deliciously silent scapegoats.

It is our responsibility, as always, to protect our patients from things that would harm them. Therefore, as physicians, it is our duty to refuse to perform a medical procedure that is not medically indicated. Any medical procedure. Whatever the pseudo-justification.

It’s time for a little old-fashioned civil disobedience.
Here are a few steps we can take as physicians to protect our patients from legislation such as this.

1. Just don’t comply. No matter how much our autonomy as physicians has been eroded, we still have control of what our hands do and do not do with a transvaginal ultrasound wand. If this legislation is completely ignored by the people who are supposed to implement it, it will soon be worth less than the paper it is written on.

2. Reinforce patient autonomy. It does not matter what a politician says. A woman is in charge of determining what does and what does not go into her body. If she WANTS a transvaginal ultrasound, fine. If it’s medically indicated, fine… have that discussion with her. We have informed consent for a reason. If she has to be forced to get a transvaginal ultrasound through coercion or overly impassioned argument or implied threats of withdrawal of care, that is NOT FINE.

Our position is to recommend medically-indicated tests and treatments that have a favorable benefit-to-harm ratio… and it is up to the patient to decide what she will and will not allow. Period. Politicians do not have any role in this process. NO ONE has a role in this process but the patient and her physician. If anyone tries to get in the way of that, it is our duty to run interference.

3. If you are forced to document a non-indicated transvaginal ultrasound because of this legislation, document that the patient refused the procedure or that it was not medically indicated. (Because both of those are true.) Hell, document that you attempted but the patient kicked you in the nose, if you have to.

4. If you are forced to enter an image of the ultrasound itself into the patient chart, ultrasound the bedsheets and enter that picture with a comment of “poor acoustic window”. If you’re really gutsy, enter a comment of “poor acoustic window…plus, I’m not a rapist.” (I was going to propose repeatedly entering a single identical image in affected patient’s charts nationwide, as a recognizable visual protest…but I don’t have an ultrasound image that I own to the point that I could offer it for that purpose.)

5. Do anything else you can think of to protect your patients and the integrity of the medical profession. IN THAT ORDER. We already know how vulnerable patients can be; we invisibly protect them on a daily basis from all kinds of dangers inside and outside of the hospital. Their safety is our responsibility, and we practically kill ourselves to ensure it at all costs. But it’s also our responsibility to guard the practice of medicine from people who would hijack our tools of healing for their own political or monetary gain.

In recent years, we have been abject failures in this responsibility, and untold numbers of people have gleefully taken advantage of that. Silently allowing a politician to manipulate our medical decision-making for the purposes of an ideological goal erodes any tiny scrap of trust we might have left.

It comes down to this: When the community has failed a patient by voting an ideologue into office…When the ideologue has failed the patient by writing legislation in his own interest instead of in the patient’s…When the legislative system has failed the patient by allowing the legislation to be considered… When the government has failed the patient by allowing something like this to be signed into law… We as physicians cannot and must not fail our patients by ducking our heads and meekly doing as we’re told.

Because we are their last line of defense.


Reprinted with the kind permission of John Scalzi at Whatever.scalzi.com.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 7

Next

Comments
Totem

Totem

I'm lost
December 2008

MAR 25, 2012 06:07 AM

Hear, hear!

Psyche

Psyche

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 25, 2012 02:35 PM

This is really awesome. I've been waiting to read the physician response to this. I've been wondering too, if the government is going to conduct internal investigations on physicians to decipher whether or not who is actually performing these invasive mandated ultrasounds too. Hopefully they won't regulate it, so that these doctors who uphold high medical standards and privacy rights won't put their medical licenses in jeopardy.

ZPO

ZPO

Roy, WA
July 2004

MAR 25, 2012 10:16 PM

Very well written. I commend the anonymous doctor. I agree wholeheartedly with the 3rd paragraph. Inserting anything into a woman's vagina without her fully informed and non-coerced consent constitutes rape.

Otoki

Otoki

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

MAR 26, 2012 07:32 AM

A critique on this piece.

If you're a doctor and you really want to fight back against the right on abortion, why not start by providing abortion? Sure, that would mean that anonymity for your political views is stripped from you, but if you're going to scold others to break the law and put themselves in danger, the least you can do is set a good example by being public and providing abortion.

...

While it's always theoretically possible that doctors who do this will get away with it, the result if they get caught will not be that they generate outrage in a complacent public and get the law changed. No, they're probably just going to get their license stripped, and be unable to perform legal abortions. Which is what anti-choicers want.

Serene

Serene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 26, 2012 12:23 PM

Otoki said:
A critique on this piece.

If you're a doctor and you really want to fight back against the right on abortion, why not start by providing abortion? Sure, that would mean that anonymity for your political views is stripped from you, but if you're going to scold others to break the law and put themselves in danger, the least you can do is set a good example by being public and providing abortion.

...

While it's always theoretically possible that doctors who do this will get away with it, the result if they get caught will not be that they generate outrage in a complacent public and get the law changed. No, they're probably just going to get their license stripped, and be unable to perform legal abortions. Which is what anti-choicers want.



Thank you for posting that article Otoki.



Civil disobedience works best if it has a public component, to draw attention to your issues in hopes of changing the law. Privately doctoring files doesn't accomplish that.


Selene

Selene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 26, 2012 03:38 PM

Otoki said:
A critique on this piece.

If you're a doctor and you really want to fight back against the right on abortion, why not start by providing abortion? Sure, that would mean that anonymity for your political views is stripped from you, but if you're going to scold others to break the law and put themselves in danger, the least you can do is set a good example by being public and providing abortion.

...

While it's always theoretically possible that doctors who do this will get away with it, the result if they get caught will not be that they generate outrage in a complacent public and get the law changed. No, they're probably just going to get their license stripped, and be unable to perform legal abortions. Which is what anti-choicers want.



Obviously my scope is limited on the laws, but aside from saying that falsifying patient charts would get your license taken away (which would happen regardless of your field), this doctor didn't say anything about what doctors could/should do in a situation where all parties object, should as saying an image was unattainable (which was offered in the first article).

Although the Governor ended up not supporting the trans-vaginal ultrasound bill after all so maybe doctors won't have to worry about being in such an awkward situation...at least for now.

Otoki

Otoki

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

MAR 27, 2012 07:03 AM

Selene said:

Otoki said:
A critique on this piece.

If you're a doctor and you really want to fight back against the right on abortion, why not start by providing abortion? Sure, that would mean that anonymity for your political views is stripped from you, but if you're going to scold others to break the law and put themselves in danger, the least you can do is set a good example by being public and providing abortion.

...

While it's always theoretically possible that doctors who do this will get away with it, the result if they get caught will not be that they generate outrage in a complacent public and get the law changed. No, they're probably just going to get their license stripped, and be unable to perform legal abortions. Which is what anti-choicers want.



Obviously my scope is limited on the laws, but aside from saying that falsifying patient charts would get your license taken away (which would happen regardless of your field), this doctor didn't say anything about what doctors could/should do in a situation where all parties object, should as saying an image was unattainable (which was offered in the first article).


Saying "We couldn't get a clear image" doesn't deal with the very real problem of women who would be scared off from the clinic by the very thought of having to look at an ultrasound of the fetus.

Although the Governor ended up not supporting the trans-vaginal ultrasound bill after all so maybe doctors won't have to worry about being in such an awkward situation...at least for now.


But in the mean time what abortion doctors don't need is suggestions about how THEY should get around this law, as if it's their sole responsibility to make abortions accessible in the face of idiotic law.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAR 27, 2012 09:37 AM

The "no clear image" thing can help reduce the issue of ultrasounds as disincentive by removing some of its teeth. If women know that many doctors are refusing to obey the law, they'll be able to seek out such a doctor. It's not better than no law, of course, but it's a step above all doctors obeying the law.

Asking doctors who don't like the law to provide abortions is also problematic. If they're not already a provider, there's probably a reason. The political exposure is one issue, of course, but it's also a not-insignificant possibility that the doctor simply isn't morally comfortable providing abortions. Pro-choice and pro-life are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and pro-life doesn't necessarily mean pro-ultrasound-rape.

Overall, the viability of doctoral civil disobedience depends on participation. A bunch of guys camping out on Wall Street didn't sound like something with any lasting power, either, until a fuck-million people across the planet participated.

Thistle

Thistle

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 27, 2012 10:11 AM

I certainly don't think it's a bad thing for individual doctors to decide that if such a law is passed they will not participate in violating their patients. It's easy to debate about what constitutes civil disobedience, but in the examining room what matters to the patient is whether or not she is going to be violated, not whether her doctor is making a difference in the wider movement.

It's so easy to abandon the good in the pursuit of the perfect.

Serene

Serene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 27, 2012 11:28 AM

It seems to me the repercussions of publicly condemning a trans-vaginal ultrasound when it is unnecessary, and refusing to provide it (also when it is not medically needed) would be no worse than being caught privately falsifying records....and possibly more effective in spreading information about this issue.
I can see word getting out to female patients that a certain Dr. refuses to perform a procedure (when medically unnecessary), but I imagine if it gets around that the Dr. falsifies patient records, he will be investigated and have his license revoked.

Although to be fair, I'd much rather have my records falsified than go through any medical procedure without consent.

MadViking

MadViking

USA
February 2008

MAR 27, 2012 12:16 PM

Having worked at a medical practice I have seen doctors routinely order tests and lab work that was unneeded as long as they knew the patients insurance would cover it. Their silence on this doesn't shock me but I'm a little cynical.

JeremyRawr

JeremyRawr

Orlando, FL
December 2011

MAR 27, 2012 04:34 PM

THIS IS FUCKING SICK!!

Thistle

Thistle

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

MAR 28, 2012 09:59 AM

MadViking said:
Having worked at a medical practice I have seen doctors routinely order tests and lab work that was unneeded as long as they knew the patients insurance would cover it. Their silence on this doesn't shock me but I'm a little cynical.



Not medically necessary is not the same as done without consent.

Selene

Selene

SUICIDEGIRL

Oregon, USA

MAR 28, 2012 10:53 PM

Thistle said:

MadViking said:
Having worked at a medical practice I have seen doctors routinely order tests and lab work that was unneeded as long as they knew the patients insurance would cover it. Their silence on this doesn't shock me but I'm a little cynical.



Not medically necessary is not the same as done without consent.



This. Going along with a doctor and getting some extra blood work is not the same as a large imaging rod being shoved in an orifice against your will.

MadViking

MadViking

USA
February 2008

MAR 29, 2012 08:47 PM

It was not my intent to equate lab work with a very private intrusive procedure. However I have seen doctors request these procedures for women that did not seem to require them but because the insurance would pay for the procedure they had them consent to it and would add diagnoses that had not been in their medical chart to support the test.

Again I might have just had a bad experience but I think some doctors are more concerned with running tests that are unnecessary just to help their bottom line.So if they have the excuse of performing this abominable test but stand to make a profit they won't speak out against it.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 7

Next